| |
|
RSS Feed - WebSphere MQ Support
|
RSS Feed - Message Broker Support
|
  |
|
| Channel 'SYSTEM.DEF.SVRCONN' Ended Abnormally. |
« View previous topic :: View next topic » |
| Author |
Message
|
| josec |
 Posted: Tue May 22, 2018 8:14 am Post subject: Channel 'SYSTEM.DEF.SVRCONN' Ended Abnormally. |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 22 May 2018
Posts: 2
|
Greetings,
I'm getting the following error:
5/14/2018 17:23:49 - Process(11420.2961) User(MUSR_MQADMIN) Program(amqrmppa.exe)
Host(server) Installation(Installation1)
VRMF(7.5.0.2) QMgr(QM_ESB)
AMQ9999: Channel 'SYSTEM.DEF.SVRCONN' to host 'server (ip)' ended
abnormally.
EXPLANATION:
The channel program running under process ID 11420(18600) for channel
'SYSTEM.DEF.SVRCONN' ended abnormally. The host name is 'server
(ip)'; in some cases the host name cannot be determined and so is shown
as '????'.
It tells me to check previous messages and they shows this:
AMQ9513: Maximum number of channels reached.
The maximum number of channels that can be in use simultaneously has been reached. The number of permitted channels is a configurable parameter in the queue manager configuration file.
Wait for some of the operating channels to close. Retry the operation when some channels are available.
The MaxChannel count is set to 1000 on the qm.ini file.
Can someone help me on identifying the root cause? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| exerk |
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2018 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Posts: 6339
|
The root cause is that the maximum number of active channels has been reached, so you need to identify which client application is racking up the most connections and is either not closing them correctly, or it needs more connections than you have set currently.
Also, using SYSTEM.DEF.SVRCONN is a really, really BAD idea - give each application its own, then if one goes totally tonto and spawns new connections such that you hit MAXACTIVE again, you can 'kill' that one connection without affecting others.
_________________
It's puzzling, I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this before...and it's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Tue May 22, 2018 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2538
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| exerk wrote: |
| Also, using SYSTEM.DEF.SVRCONN is a really, really BAD idea - give each application its own, then if one goes totally tonto and spawns new connections such that you hit MAXACTIVE again, you can 'kill' that one connection without affecting others. |
Agree. Create separate SVRCONN type channels for each app and set MAXINST and MAXINSTC to reasonable values. Set the security parameters appropriately. Each channel should have a unique MCAUSER setting, and MQ authority profiles set up to limit access to objects based on group memberships.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| josec |
| Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 4:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 22 May 2018
Posts: 2
|
| Thanks for the suggestions. I didn't have any part in the design of this system, so I'm not sure how the company will proceed, but I'll show them this comments so they can evaluate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| gbaddeley |
| Posted: Wed May 23, 2018 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
Posts: 2538
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| josec wrote: |
| Thanks for the suggestions. I didn't have any part in the design of this system, so I'm not sure how the company will proceed, but I'll show them this comments so they can evaluate. |
We are suggesting industry best practices. Try to change the uninformed design choices while you can.
_________________
Glenn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
